
Ukraine's sovereignty was violated long before Trump
The bid is part of a minerals deal signed in April that is supposed to give the US access to Ukraine's mineral wealth. The agreement was negotiated over months and was touted by Trump as 'payback' for US military support for the Ukrainian military.
The final text, which the Ukrainian side has celebrated as 'more favourable' compared with previous iterations, paves the way for US investment in the mining and energy sectors in Ukraine. Investment decisions will be made jointly by US and Ukrainian officials, profits will not be taxed and US companies will get preferential treatment in tenders and auctions.
Trump's demand for access to Ukrainian mineral wealth was slammed by many as infringing on Ukrainian sovereignty and being exploitative at a time when the country is fighting a war and is highly dependent on US arms supplies. But that is hardly an aberration in the record of relations between Ukraine and the West. For more than a decade now, Kyiv has faced Western pressure to make decisions that are not necessarily in the interests of its people.
Interference in domestic affairs
Perhaps the most well-known accusations of Western influence peddling have to do with the son of former US President Joe Biden – Hunter Biden. He became a board member of the Ukrainian natural gas company Burisma in May 2014, three months after Viktor Yanukovych, the pro-Russian president of Ukraine, fled to Russia during nationwide protests.
At that time, Joe Biden was not only vice president in President Barack Obama's administration but also its pointman on US-Ukrainian relations. Over five years, Hunter Biden earned up to $50,000 a month as a board member. The apparent conflict of interest in this case bothered even Ukraine's European allies.
But Joe Biden's interference went much further than that. As vice president, he openly threatened then-Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko with blocking $1bn in US aid if he did not dismiss the Ukrainian prosecutor general, whom Washington opposed.
When Biden became president, his administration – along with the European Union – put pressure on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to give foreign 'experts' a key role in the election of judges for Ukraine's courts. As a result, three of the six members on the Ethics Council of the High Council of Justice, which vets judges, are now members of international organisations.
There was fierce opposition to this reform, even from within Zelenskyy's own political party. Nevertheless, he felt compelled to proceed.
The Ukrainian government also adopted other unpopular laws under Western pressure. In 2020, the parliament passed a bill introduced by Zelenskyy that removed a ban on the sale of private farmland. Although polls consistently showed the majority of Ukrainians to be against such a move, pressure from the West forced the Ukrainian president's hand.
Widespread protests against the move were muffled by COVID-19 pandemic restrictions. Subsequently, Ukraine's agricultural sector became even more dominated by large, export-oriented multinational companies with deleterious consequences for the country's food security.
Attempts to challenge these unpopular laws were undermined by attacks on courts. For example, the Kyiv District Administrative Court ruled that the judicial reform law violated Ukraine's sovereignty and constitution, but this decision was invalidated when Zelenskyy dissolved the court after the US imposed sanctions on its head judge, Pavlo Vovk, over accusations of corruption.
The Constitutional Court, where there were also attempts to challenge some of these laws, also faced pressure. In 2020, Zelenskyy tried to fire all the court's judges and annul their rulings but failed. Then in 2021, Oleksandr Tupytskyi, the chairman of the court, was sanctioned by the US, again over corruption accusations. This facilitated his removal shortly thereafter.
With Western interference in Ukrainian internal affairs made so apparent, public confidence in the sovereignty of the state was undermined. A 2021 poll showed that nearly 40 percent of Ukrainians did not believe their country was fully independent.
Economic sovereignty
In step with interference in Ukraine's governance, its economy has also faced foreign pressures. In 2016, US Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt urged the country to become an 'agricultural superpower'. And it appears that the country indeed has gone down that path, continuing the process of deindustrialisation.
From 2010 to 2019, industry's share of Ukraine's gross domestic product fell by 3.7 percentage points while that of agriculture rose by 3.4 percentage points.
This didn't benefit Ukrainians. UNICEF found that nearly 20 percent of Ukrainians suffered from 'moderate to severe food insecurity' from 2018 to 2020, a figure that rose to 28 percent by 2022. This is more than twice as high as the same figure for the EU.
This is because the expansion of agriculture has favoured export-oriented monocrops like sunflowers, corn and soya beans. Although Ukraine became the world's biggest exporter of sunflower oil in 2019, a 2021 study found that the domination of agriculture by intensively farmed monoculture has put 40 percent of the country's soil at risk of depletion.
The 2016 free trade agreement with the EU also encouraged low-cost exports. Due to the restrictive provisions of the agreement, Ukrainian business complained that domestic products were often unable to reach European markets while European producers flooded Ukraine. Ukraine had a 4-billion-euro ($4.7bn) trade deficit with the EU in 2021, exporting raw materials and importing processed goods and machinery.
Meanwhile, Ukraine's industrial output collapsed under the blows of closed export markets, Western competition and neoliberal economic policies at home. According to the Ministry of Economy, by 2019, automobile production had shrunk to 31 percent of its 2012 level, train wagon production to 29.7 percent, machine tool production to 68.2 percent, metallurgical production to 70.8 percent and agricultural machinery production to 68.4 percent.
In 2020, the government under the newly elected Zelenskyy tried to intervene. It proposed new legislation to protect Ukrainian industry, Bill 3739, which aimed to limit the amount of foreign goods purchased by Ukrainian state contracts. Member of parliament Dmytro Kiselevsky pointed to the fact that while only 5 to 8 percent of state contracts in the US and EU are fulfilled with imports, the same figures stood at 40 to 50 percent in Ukraine.
But Bill 3739 was immediately criticised by the EU, the US and pro-Western NGOs in Ukraine. This was despite the fact that Western countries have a range of methods to protect their markets and state purchases from foreigners. Ultimately, Bill 3739 was passed with significant amendments that provided exceptions for companies from the US and the EU.
The recent renewal of EU tariffs on Ukrainian agricultural exports, which had been lifted in 2022, is yet another confirmation that the West protects its own markets but wants unrestricted access to Ukraine's, to the detriment of the Ukrainian economy. Ukrainian officials worry that this move would cut economic growth this year from the projected 2.7 percent to 0.9 percent and cost the country $3.5bn in lost revenues.
In light of all this, Trump's mineral deal reflects continuity in Western policy on Ukraine rather than a rupture. What the US president did differently was show to the public how Western leaders bully the Ukrainian government to get what they want – something that usually happens behind closed doors.
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Al Jazeera
an hour ago
- Al Jazeera
Trump slams ex-ally Musk's political party as ‘ridiculous'
United States President Donald Trump has slammed former ally Elon Musk's launching of a new political party as 'ridiculous', deepening the Republican's feud with the man who was once his biggest backer. The world's richest man was almost inseparable from Trump as he headed the cost-cutting Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), but they fell out hard over the president's 'big beautiful' tax and spending mega-bill. 'I think it's ridiculous to start a third party,' Trump told reporters on Sunday before he boarded Air Force One on his way back to Washington, DC from his New Jersey golf club. 'It's always been a two-party system, and I think starting a third party just adds to confusion. Third parties have never worked. So he can have fun with it, but I think it's ridiculous,' he said. South African-born Musk announced on Saturday that he would found the America Party to challenge what he called the 'one-party system' in the US. SpaceX and Tesla tycoon Musk says the president's massive domestic spending plan would explode the US debt, and has promised to do everything in his power to defeat lawmakers who voted for it. The former DOGE head, who led a huge drive to slash federal spending and cut jobs, equated Trump's Republicans with rival Democrats when it came to domestic spending. 'When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy,' Musk posted on X, the social media platform he owns. Musk gave few details of his plan, and it was not clear whether he had registered the party with US electoral authorities, but it could cause Republicans headaches in the 2026 midterm elections and beyond. 'TRAIN WRECK' In a sign of how sensitive the issue could be for Trump, he took to his Truth Social network while still on Air Force One to double down on his assault on Musk. 'I am saddened to watch Elon Musk go completely 'off the rails,' essentially becoming a TRAIN WRECK over the past five weeks,' Trump posted. 'The one thing Third Parties are good for is the creation of Complete and Total DISRUPTION & CHAOS, and we have enough of that with the Radical Left Democrats.' In a lengthy diatribe, Trump repeated his earlier assertion that Musk's ownership of electric vehicle company Tesla had made him turn on the president due to the spending bill cutting subsidies for such automobiles. Musk has insisted that his opposition is primarily due to the bill increasing the US fiscal deficit and sovereign debt. Earlier on Sunday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent also threw shade at Musk's attempts to enter the political fray, telling him to stick to running his companies. When asked by CNN if Musk's plan bothered the Trump administration, Bessent offered thinly veiled criticism. 'I believe that the boards of directors at his various companies wanted him to come back and run those companies, which he is better at than anyone,' Bessent said. 'So I imagine that those boards of directors did not like this announcement yesterday and will be encouraging him to focus on his business activities, not his political activities.' Musk left DOGE in May to focus full-time on his corporate responsibilities, with Tesla's sales and image especially suffering from his brief venture into Trump's inner circle. Trump gave him a grand sendoff in the Oval Office in a bizarre ceremony during which Musk appeared with a black eye and received a golden key to the White House from the president. But just days later, the two were exchanging bitter insults on social media after Musk criticised Trump's flagship spending bill. Trump would not comment on Sunday when asked if he would be asking Musk to return the golden key.


Al Jazeera
3 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
LIVE: Israel pounds Gaza, Yemen; Houthis fire more missiles
Israeli forces continue to pound Gaza after killing at least 82 Palestinians on Sunday, including 10 people waiting for food aid. US President Donald Trump says there is a 'good chance' that a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas could be reached this week.


Al Jazeera
4 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
‘Nail in a coffin': Trump's steel, aluminum tariffs bleed Indian foundries
Kolkata, India — For the past several years, the United States has been a major market for Aditya Garodia to export more than 100 items of steel derivatives like fasteners from his factory in West Bengal state in eastern India. But ever since US President Donald Trump took office and unleashed a range of tariffs – 25 percent on steel and aluminium initially, as well as standalone country tariffs – global markets have been on edge, creating significant uncertainty for businesses across sectors. Garodia, director of Corona Steel Industry Pvt Ltd, told Al Jazeera that as a result of the tariffs, clients have slowed picking up their orders, delaying payments by a month on average, while business in general has slowed as customers adopted a wait-and-watch policy. When Trump announced that he was doubling tariffs on steel and aluminium to 50 percent from June 4, it was 'like a nail in a coffin', Garodia said, as nearly 30 percent of orders were cancelled. 'It is difficult for the market to absorb such high tariffs.' Demand in the domestic market has also been low because of competition from cheaper Chinese products, he said, adding their future depends on India negotiating a lower tariff for its exports to the US than its competitors. Last year, India exported $4.56bn worth of iron, steel and aluminium products to the US. Tariffs 'play well in politics' During his first term, Trump in 2018 imposed tariffs of 25 percent on steel and 10 percent on aluminium under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, citing national security concerns. But certain businesses had managed to escape, as there were no tariffs on finished products. But on February 10, 2025, he announced 25 percent tariffs on steel and aluminium, including derivatives – or finished products – and removed all exemptions. Ajay Srivastava, founder of Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI), a trade research group, told Al Jazeera that higher tariffs imposed in 2018 have so far failed to revive the US steel industry. 'Since the tariffs were first implemented in 2018, [US] steel imports have increased,' rising from $98.6bn to $114bn in 2024, he said, and they 'haven't cut imports or boosted production, but they've mostly stuck around because they play well in politics'. As a result, prices in the US are far higher than in Europe or China, 'making cars, buildings, and machines more expensive to produce. India now needs a clear strategy to protect its trade interests, push for fair deals and strengthen domestic manufacturing,' Srivastava said. Foundries also affected In the so-called reciprocal tariffs that President Trump announced on April 2, he set a rate of 26 percent for goods from India. He put that on hold on April 9 for 90 days and introduced a 10 percent base tariff on all countries for the interim, giving them breathing room to strike individual trade deals with the US. While the 10 percent is hard enough on the businesses, foundries – where metals are melted to cast into shape – say 26 percent is too high for any business to absorb. India has approximately 5,000 foundries, of which 400 cater to both domestic and international markets and a further 100 are exclusively for exports. Several Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs), in turn, supply pig iron, scrap and other items to the exporters. Indian foundries export products worth about $4bn globally, out of which the US market is $1.2bn, Ravi Sehgal, chairman of National Centre for Export Promotion (NCEP), said. In the US, they compete not only with local foundries but also with Chinese and Turkish suppliers. The latest set of tariffs will be a considerable blow to Indian foundries. More than 65 percent of these, and their suppliers of raw materials, are MSMEs that will 'face the brunt of tariffs due to lower orders', Sehgal said. Tariffs beyond 10-14 percent 'would [make it] difficult for us to survive,' he added. Pradeep Kumar Madhogaria, partner in Yashi Castings, which makes moulding boxes and pallet cars for foundries, said that several foundry projects have been either deferred or shelved, particularly those aligned to export-driven demand, due to the uncertainty in the US market. Smaller units badly hit Sumit Agarwal, 44, a Kolkata-based manufacturer of clamps, brackets and other items used in industrial goods, told Al Jazeera that his business has been hit hard by the tariffs and he is thinking of laying off some of his 15 employees. 'We are a small unit. The orders have practically dried up after the introduction of tariffs, which has made it difficult for us to continue with our existing staff. I am thinking about cutting at least 30-40 percent of my manpower. Business from the domestic market is just average, and the drop in the export market has added to our woes.' Shyam Kumar Poddar, 70, who runs a small unit of sheet metal fabrication in Kolkata, recently invested about 800,000 rupees ($9,400) to buy a hydraulic press with an aim to expand his business. But the drop in orders has affected him badly. 'I bought the machine just four months ago to expand my business, but there have been absolutely no orders for the past two months.' 'We depend on exporters for our business as there is already an intense competition in the domestic market, but the present scenario is harming small entrepreneurs like us.' Pankaj Chadha, chairman of Engineering Export Promotion Council of India (EEPC), an industry body, told Al Jazeera that diversification to countries like Peru and Chile, who would then export their finished products to the US, is the only way for survival as it was 'not possible to do business with such high tariffs'. Even as the 90-day pause on tariffs is set to expire soon, it's not clear yet what the final number will be as India and the US are yet to finalise a deal. On Friday, Piyush Goyal, India's minister of trade and industry, told reporters that while India was ready to make a trade deal, 'National interest will always be supreme', and it would not be driven by any deadlines. For now, Garodia is hoping a solution will be found fast. 'No industry can survive in isolation,' he said, listing US problems, including a manpower shortage as well as higher production and raw material costs. 'India offers them a good substitute with cheap labour and low cost of production,' he said.